Do we have to be nice?

[Xeno.of.athens]

In the presence of significant theological differences, is it necessary to remain cordial to each other? Is it acceptable to be courteous while expressing one's grounds for disagreement? And ultimately, after articulating our objections and hearing the expected corrections and clarifications, must we continue to be kind?

Is there a theological principle that informs your response?

 

[RDKirk]

In the presence of significant theological differences, is it necessary to remain cordial to each other? Is it acceptable to be courteous while expressing one's grounds for disagreement? And ultimately, after articulating our objections and hearing the expected corrections and clarifications, must we continue to be kind?

Is there a theological principle that informs your response?

• Romans 14:1: "Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters."
• Romans 14:3-4: Paul emphasizes mutual acceptance, stating that one person’s dietary practices should not lead to judgment by others, as each person is accountable to God.
• Romans 14:13: "Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister."
• Romans 14:19: Paul concludes by urging believers to pursue peace and mutual edification in these disagreements.

 

[seeking.IAM]

Proverbs 15:1 A soft answer turns away wrath.

Ephesians 4:29 Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.

Ephesians 4: 32 Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

 

[lismore]

1 Peter 3:15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.

God Bless All

 

[RandyPNW]

In the presence of significant theological differences, is it necessary to remain cordial to each other? Is it acceptable to be courteous while expressing one's grounds for disagreement? And ultimately, after articulating our objections and hearing the expected corrections and clarifications, must we continue to be kind?

Is there a theological principle that informs your response?

This is a great question, because the answer is not simple. I think it requires both biblical knowledge and personal knowledge of God.

The biblical principle is that God is love and we have to try to be like Him. But biblically, we know that God, despite His loving nature, judges people for all eternity. How we process God's "love" in this is, I think, important.

We should try to be cordial as witnesses to others of God's Salvation. Even those who are philosophical enemies to our religious beliefs can be treated cordially and kindly.

But this doesn't mean that those hostile to our faith are necessarily closed-minded entirely. So we should persevere in our witness to them, being patient to see if there is any openness to God's truths.

But those who are outright dangerous enemies we should withdraw from, and not try to force-feed them truths they hate and would retaliate against. King David in the Psalms did not hesitate to call them enemies that he wished God would judge and destroy.

So in my view it is a matter of discernment, a matter of knowing God well. These truths, as we live them out, will teach us how to treat others. At any rate, like God is love we must always be cognizant of our duty to represent His love, as well. Not easy to do, nor is it easy to always know how we should respond.

 

[Aaron112]

Is there a theological principle that informs your response?

ALWAYS be TRUTHFUL. not nice. be kind, and straightforward truthful. It will offend many.

 

[Mark Quayle]

In the presence of significant theological differences, is it necessary to remain cordial to each other? Is it acceptable to be courteous while expressing one's grounds for disagreement? And ultimately, after articulating our objections and hearing the expected corrections and clarifications, must we continue to be kind?

Is there a theological principle that informs your response?

I should think that would depend on the venue, or the reason for the interaction.

 

[Mr. M]

In the presence of significant theological differences, is it necessary to remain cordial to each other? Is it acceptable to be courteous while expressing one's grounds for disagreement? And ultimately, after articulating our objections and hearing the expected corrections and clarifications, must we continue to be kind?

Is there a theological principle that informs your response?

Matthew 7:12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you,
do also to them,
for this is the Law and the Prophets.

 

[Aaron112]

Be Kind as Instructed. Not nice which is carnal and fleshly.

"Do Not Be Nice​

Based on the search results, “not being nice” is often misunderstood as being rude or unpleasant. However, it can also mean being authentic and honest, without sugarcoating or pretending to be someone you’re not. This approach can be refreshing and liberating, as it allows individuals to be themselves without fear of judgment or rejection."

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Isn't it a quibble to make a sharp distinction between nice and kind?

 

[public hermit]

Isn't it a quibble to make a sharp distinction between nice and kind?

I think it is. If one can't be nice, I doubt kindness will be any easier.

I think one should be kind in debate, but it's not easy. I am not always the way I would rather be in the exchange of ideas. But they are ideas and must fall short of the reality. Even if they're true, they can't capture the essence of divinity and , most likely, related subjects. For me, that should be enough to gently hold what I understand to be true. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up, and so on.

 

[bling]

In the presence of significant theological differences, is it necessary to remain cordial to each other? Is it acceptable to be courteous while expressing one's grounds for disagreement? And ultimately, after articulating our objections and hearing the expected corrections and clarifications, must we continue to be kind?

Is there a theological principle that informs your response?

be like Christ.

 

[RDKirk]

Be Kind as Instructed. Not nice which is carnal and fleshly.

"Do Not Be Nice​

Based on the search results, “not being nice” is often misunderstood as being rude or unpleasant. However, it can also mean being authentic and honest, without sugarcoating or pretending to be someone you’re not. This approach can be refreshing and liberating, as it allows individuals to be themselves without fear of judgment or rejection."

Whatever word you want to use, you've already been given pertinent scripture for how to approach other people, particularly other brothers and sisters within the Body of Christ:

Proverbs 15:1 A soft answer turns away wrath.

"Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone." -- Colossians 4:6

Ephesians 4:29 Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.

Ephesians 4: 32 Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.

 

[Mr. M]

I think it is. If one can't be nice, I doubt kindness will be any easier.

Nice is rightly associated with 'Easy', Like coloring your hair, it is superficial and common to all. Kindness is sacrificial.

Ephesians 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

The kindness shown by our Savior was not easy.

 

[public hermit]

Nice is rightly associated with 'Easy', Like coloring your hair, it is superficial and common to all. Kindness is sacrificial.
View attachment 357273
Ephesians 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

The kindness shown by our Savior was not easy.

What does easy mean in that sense?

 

[Mr. M]

What does easy mean in that sense?

Children can be taught to "play nice".
Kindness=chrestotes, is a fruit of the Spirit.
I thought that superficial vs. sacrificial would suffice.
Colossians 3:12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness,
G5544 humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
Or am I just being too scriptural?

 

[public hermit]

Children can be taught to "play nice".
Kindness=chrestotes, is a fruit of the Spirit.
I thought that superficial vs. sacrificial would suffice.
Colossians 3:12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness,
G5544 humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;
Or am I just being too scriptural?

I don't see the distinction between being nice and being kind that you are making. Are kind people not nice? If not, what does that look like?

 

[Mr. M]

I don't see the distinction between being nice and being kind that you are making. Are kind people not nice? If not, what does that look like?

Psalm 141:5 Let the righteous strike me;
It shall be a kindness.
And let him rebuke me;
It shall be as excellent oil;
Let my head not refuse it.

You are not thinking in godly terms.
I am sure in the general sense of the English language they may be treated as synonyms.
The answer to the question posed does somewhat limit the discussion to "polite conversation" in a forum.
However, kindness to others can require a steadfastness that may come across as "not very nice".
Any parent knows that there are times when their lovingkindness for their children is expressed by way of discipline and restrictions that to a child seems mean, even harsh.
In the scriptures, kindness is linked directly to love. (i.e.lovingkindness=hesed, and is merciful).
Is being nice merciful? Not according to the Word of God.
People quickly write off being nice by excusing themselves as being in a bad mood.

 

[public hermit]

You are not thinking in godly terms.

You have no idea what I am thinking. It's foolish to suggest otherwise.

Now, in pointing that out, am I being nice or am I being kind? Maybe stating the fact is too blunt. If I were being nice, maybe I would ask how you knew what I was thinking. Is that what you mean? Was I being kind in just stating the fact that you have no earthly idea what I am thinking or in what terms I am thinking? I don't think it was unkind, but it doesn't seem necessarily kind, either. If I were being kind, I might gently tell you how you couldn't possibly know what I am thinking. I don't think I was being kind or nice. And to be honest, I don't think that was the best way to navigate this disagreement.

 

[RDKirk]

You have no idea what I am thinking. It's foolish to suggest otherwise.

Now, in pointing that out, am I being nice or am I being kind? Maybe stating the fact is too blunt. If I were being nice, maybe I would ask how you knew what I was thinking. Is that what you mean? Was I being kind in just stating the fact that you have no earthly idea what I am thinking or in what terms I am thinking? I don't think it was unkind, but it doesn't seem necessarily kind, either. If I were being kind, I might gently tell you how you couldn't possibly know what I am thinking. I don't think I was being kind or nice. And to be honest, I don't think that was the best way to navigate this disagreement.

These recent years, people have begun redefining "nice" as "unauthentic," even though "unauthentic" is already a perfectly good word for what it means. "Kind" is reserved for being authentically nice.